This page gives an
introduction to Judith Butler and the arguments put forward in her 1990 book Gender
Trouble. Her subsequent publications (see bibliography
at the bottom of this page) are covered here less. There are also links
to a good student essay on Butler, and some interview extracts (both on this site),
as well as web resources on other sites. Our queer theory
pages have also expanded -- now featuring reviews
and discussion of criticisms of queer theory.

Who is Judith Butler?

Judith
Butler (1956-) is Professor of Comparative Literature and Rhetoric at the University
of California, Berkeley, and is well known as a theorist of power, gender, sexuality
and identity. Indeed, she is described in alt.culture as "one of the superstars
of '90s academia, with a devoted following of grad students nationwide". (A fanzine,
Judy!, was published in 1993).

What has she said?

In
her most influential book Gender Trouble (1990), Butler argued that feminism
had made a mistake by trying to assert that 'women' were a group with common characteristics
and interests. That approach, Butler said, performed 'an unwitting regulation
and reification of gender relations' -- reinforcing a binary view of gender relations
in which human beings are divided into two clear-cut groups, women and men. Rather
than opening up possibilities for a person to form and choose their own individual
identity, therefore, feminism had closed the options down.

Butler notes that feminists rejected the idea that biology is destiny, but
then developed an account of patriarchal culture which assumed that masculine
and feminine genders would inevitably be built, by culture, upon 'male' and 'female'
bodies, making the same destiny just as inescapable. That argument allows no room
for choice, difference or resistance.

Butler prefers 'those historical and anthropological positions that understand
gender as a relation among socially constituted subjects in specifiable contexts'.
In other words, rather than being a fixed attribute in a person, gender should
be seen as a fluid variable which shifts and changes in different contexts and
at different times.

The very fact that women and men can say that they feel more or less 'like
a woman' or 'like a man' shows, Butler points out, that 'the experience of a gendered...
cultural identity is considered an achievement.'

Butler argues that sex (male, female) is seen to cause gender (masculine,
feminine) which is seen to cause desire (towards the other gender). This is seen
as a kind of continuum. Butler's approach -- inspired in part by Foucault
-- is basically to smash the supposed links between these, so that gender and
desire are flexible, free-floating and not 'caused' by other stable factors.

Butler says: 'There is no gender identity behind the expressions of gender;
... identity is performatively constituted by the very "expressions" that are
said to be its results.' (Gender Trouble, p. 25). In other words, gender
is a performance; it's what you do at particular times, rather than a universal
who you are.

Butler suggests that certain cultural configurations of gender have seized
a hegemonic hold (i.e. they have come to seem natural in our culture as it presently
is) -- but, she suggests, it doesn't have to be that way. Rather than proposing
some utopian vision, with no idea of how we might get to such a state, Butler
calls for subversive action in the present: 'gender trouble' -- the mobilization,
subversive confusion, and proliferation of genders -- and therefore identity.

Butler argues that we all put on a gender performance, whether traditional
or not, anyway, and so it is not a question of whether to do a gender performance,
but what form that performance will take. By choosing to be different about it,
we might work to change gender norms and the binary understanding of masculinity
and femininity.

This idea of identity as free-floating, as not connected to an 'essence',
but instead a performance, is one of the key ideas in queer
theory. Seen in this way, our identities, gendered and otherwise, do not express
some authentic inner "core" self but are the dramatic effect (rather than
the cause) of our performances.

David Halperin has said, 'Queer is by definition whatever is at odds with
the normal, the legitimate, the dominant. There is nothing in particular to
which it necessarily refers. It is an identity without an essence.'

It's not (necessarily) just a view on sexuality, or gender. It also suggests
that the confines of any identity can potentially be reinvented by its owner...

And finally -- what has this got to do with media and communications studies?
Well, the call for gender trouble has obvious media implications, since the mass
media is the primary means for alternative images to be disseminated. The media
is therefore the site upon which this 'semiotic war' (a war of symbols, of how
things are represented) would take place. Madonna is
one media icon who can be seen to have brought queer theory to the masses.